[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 13 (Monday, February 14, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E132]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       THE MUD DUMP PERMANENT CLOSURE AND REMEDIATION ACT OF 2000

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, February 14, 2000

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing 
legislation to protect New Jersey's oceans and beaches from continued 
ocean dumping of harmful substances.
  Just a few miles off the coast of Sandy Hook lies an area that--after 
years of protracted debate and political maneuvering--was appropriately 
designated as the Historic Area Remediation Site (HARS). The 
designation was made to protect the site from the future dumping of 
toxic dredged mud. It was July, 1996 when vice President Gore 
Triumphantly announced that the dumping would stop and the site--
affectionately called the old Mud Dump--would be cleaned up with clean 
dredge material.
  Unfortunately, we now know that the 1996 announcement was not an iron 
clad commitment to end ocean dumping of toxic sludge. In a betrayal of 
our trust, the Clinton Administration's Army Corps of engineers has 
approved permits allowing Castle Astoria Terminals, Inc., and Brooklyn 
Marine Terminals, to dump dredge materials that actually contain higher 
levels of contamination (including toxic PAHs and PCBs) than the stuff 
already in the Mud Dump.
  Mr. Speaker, common sense dictates that you cannot clean up something 
by capping it with a substance dirtier than the original mess. 
Unfortunately, the ``category 1'' standards in use by the Army Corps 
and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are so insufficient that 
using the dredged mud from the Castle Astoria and Brooklyn Marine 
Terminals to remediate the HRS is like trying to clean an oil spill by 
pouring nuclear waste on top of it. It will only make a bad situation 
even worse.
  Fortunately, the interests of keeping New Jersey's and New York's 
ports open, and protecting the environment and New Jersey's multi-
billion dollar tourist industry, are not mutually exclusive. The people 
of New Jersey and New York need both the shipping and tourist 
industries to be healthy if our high standard of living is to be 
preserved. There are new ways to treat and decontaminate dredged 
materials so they are truly clean and pose no threat to the 
environment. New Jersey has been very proactive in trying to find 
creative ways of disposing of dredged materials so we can avoid the 
need to dump at sea. For example, dredged materials have
  The problem, however, is that the State of New York has done 
virtually nothing to look beyond ocean dumping for its dredging needs. 
Every objective, outside observer of the ocean dumping fight admits 
that New York is not pulling its own weight. And the bottom line is 
that as long as New York can easily and cheaply use the Jersey Shore as 
a dumping ground for its dredged soil, New York will never have any 
incentive to look for real alternatives.
  I mean to change that. Under the legislation I am introducing today, 
an immediate ban will be placed on any existing ocean dumping permits 
at the Mud Dump to be issued by the Army Corps until new remediation 
standards are in place.
  The bill also requires the EPA, within 90 days of enactment, to 
formulate a new set of remediation standards. These remediation 
standards were promised to New Jerseyans in 1996, but four years later, 
they have still to be issued. We have waited long enough for these 
standards to be promulgated. It is time for the EPA to act to protect 
the health of our oceans and beaches.
  In addition, my legislation sets forth basic principles that the EPA 
must follow when developing and proposing new remediation material 
standards.
  First, the actual level of contaminants (including PAHs and PCBs) in 
the remediation material must be significantly lower than the Mud Dump 
pollutants it is to be used to cover. Sadly, under the current and 
deeply flawed EPA ``Category 1 standards,'' pollutant levels in 
proposed dredge spoils can actually exceed by many orders of magnitude 
the levels found in the material at the Mud Dump.
  Second, the remediation material used at the Mud Dump must actually 
reduce pollution levels there.
  Third, the remediation material must be shown to reduce the harmful 
impacts on the environment and marine life caused by the toxins found 
in the Mud Dump. It bears noting that the reason the HARS was created 
was not to provide the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey with 
an unlimited dumping ground. The HARS was created to remediate and 
clean up the toxins on the ocean floor and prevent harmful 
bioaccumulation of toxins in the seafood we eat.
  Fourth, the new remediation standards must meet `sunshine laws' that 
provide opportunities for a public notice and a public comment period. 
This provision is needed because the Army Corps issued the Brooklyn 
Marine Terminals permit without providing adequate public notice for 
comment. On January 24th, 2000, the Army Corps recognized its failure 
to provide adequate public comment and held a public meeting in New 
Jersey.
  Fifth, the goal of the new remediation standards is to eventually 
clean up the Mud Dump to reflect a contamination level that is 
substantially equivalent to the level found naturally in the ocean. 
Given the amount of debate over what the EPA defines as ``clean,'' it 
is important to set clear and common sense goals of what the word 
``clean'' really means--restoring the oceans to their natural state. 
Only when consumers of seafood are reassured that the fish they eat are 
free from pollutants will the damage from ocean dumping be fully 
remediated.
  Lastly, the bill would permanently close the Mud Dump as soon as it 
is fully remediated and capped with a clean layer of sand and silt that 
prevents existing pollution at the bottom of the ocean from finding its 
way into our food chain. If the economy of New York and New Jersey are 
to remain vibrant and healthy, we need to continue exploring 
alternative dredge disposal methods now. The costs of inaction greatly 
outweigh the additional costs of alternative disposal methods when one 
factors in the $14.8 billion tourist and commercial fishing industry in 
New Jersey that will be seriously harmed if ocean dumping continues 
unabated.




                          ____________________